[tied] Re: Indo-European /a/

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 02:48:14 +0000, etherman23
> <etherman23@...> wrote:
> Hitt. mehur "time" is related to Lat. ma:turus "ripe",
> ma:nus "good", ma:ne "early", IEW 2. *ma:- (= *meh2-) "gut,
> zu rechter Zeit". The Hitt. word shows long grade of the
> vowel *me:h2-

Wouldn't these be cognate with Httite ma:i "ripen"? Wouldn't mehur be
cognate with Goth me:l "time" and Lat. me:tior?

> >Why wouldn't e:H2 develope into a: in Hittite?
>
> Long and originally long vowels (*e: and *o) are not
> coloured by laryngeals.

So are you assuming an original PIE system of /e e: o o:/? AFAIK this
is different from what Saussere proposed, and what Beekes proposes.

> >The theory was invented to explain that.
> >Since H1 isn't preserved in
> >Anatolian I wonder where the actual evidence is for it.
>
> Yes, it was invented to explain that, and does so very well.
> In what way is that not evidence?

It's pretty weak. The ablaut would be evidence for any theory
designed to explain abluat.

> >> Important support also comes from the Greek three-way
> >> representation of vocalized laryngeals, with *h1 > *&1 >
> >> /e/.
> >
> >Could Greek have replaced the zero-grade with the full grade?
>
> The full grades of *eh1, *eh2 and *eh3 are e:, a: and o:,
> not e, a, o.

I realize that. I meant that e, a, and o are the full grades of e:,
a:, and o:.

> >> Greek also shows a different development of *i/u + *h1/2/3,
> >> having:
> >>
> >> *ih1 > i: *uh1 > u:
> >> *ih2 > ya: *uh2 > wa:
> >> *ih3 > yo: *uh3 > wo:
> >>
> >
> >What are the Hittite cognates to support this (not that I'm saying
> >they don't exist, I just like to know what they are)?
>
> Why only Hittite?

Any Anatolian would do. I'm looking for something else that would
show a laryngeal there. Without direct confirmation from a laryngeal
we have a situation where other explanations might exist.